This document summarizes a presentation on agriculture, forestry and other land use (AFOLU) mitigation challenges and prospects for Africa. It notes that AFOLU accounts for approximately 25% of global greenhouse gas emissions and discusses challenges including financing, poverty, institutional barriers, and competition for land. It also outlines options for managing trade-offs between mitigation and adaptation efforts in the AFOLU sector.

1. IPCC Outreach Event
Rabat, Morocco
4-5 May 2015
Dr Cheikh Mbow, Lead
authors WG III, Chap 11
World Agroforestry Centre-
ICRAF, Nairbi, Kenya
c.mbow@cigar.org
AR5 AFOLU
mitigation
challenges and
prospects for Africa

2. AFOLU (Facts)
• Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU) is unique among the
sectors in WGIII: Removals of GHGs, Reduction of emissions through
management of land and livestock.
• Agriculture is central to the livelihoods of many social groups
• AFOLU sector is responsible for ~ < 25% (~10-12 Gt CO2eq/yr) of
anthropogenic GHG emissions
• Mainly from deforestation and agricultural emissions from livestock, soil,
biomass burning and nutrient management
•2000-2010
• GHG emissions/yr-1: agricultural @ 5.0-5.8 Gt CO2eq/yr
• GHG flux/yr-1: land use change activities @ 4.3-5.5 Gt CO2eq/yr

3. Global Carbon Budget
Global Carbon Project 2013; Le Quéré et al. 2013, ESSD
1959-2013
44%
30%
26%
Energy/transp/build
/indust=75%
AFOLU=25%
C-Pools (5)
-Ocean: 77%
-Fossil: 15%
-Soil: 5%
-Living: 1.5%
-Atmos: 1.5%

4. A Large and Persistent Carbon Sink in the World's Forests
Yude Pan, et al. Science 333, 988 (2011)

5. Regional patterns of GHG emissions are shifting along with changes in the world economy.
Based on Figure 1.6

6. AFOLU emission-WGII/AR5/ Sector

7. Substantial reductions in emissions would require
large changes in investment.

8. Barriers and challenges in AFOLU
• Financing, poverty,
institutional, ecological,
technological development,
• Feedbacks to adaptation
and conservation
• Competition between
different land‐uses
• Promoting synergies:
integrated systems or multi-
functionality, e.g.
ecosystem services

9. Diagnostics
Patterns and Variability
Low Carbon
Carbon Manag. & Policy
Vulnerability
Processes & Feedbacks
● Carbon Budget
● Methane Budget+NOx
● Regional Carbon Cycle Assessment & Processes
● Component Assessments: forests, grasslands
● Carbon pools size & vulnerability
(Swamps, methane hydrates, non
CO2)
● Socio-economic drivers of
emissions
● Future carbon budgets
(permissible emissions)
● Negative emissions
● Urban development
● Energy-carbon-water
Global Carbon
Project framework

10. Land carbon cycle assessment
C-emission C-sequestration C-pools
Forest carbon stock inventory
Carbon accounting and surveys
Ecosystem models and mapping
Dynamic vegetation models
Trees Height,
DBH, TCC
Forest/trees
Biomass
Biomass change
over time
Forest
disturbance area
Field & RS
Field,Models&RS
Field & RS
Models & RS
Exploring the data requirements

11. Data gaps
• Independent observed data
• Bottom-up ecosystem inventories of land fluxes,
biomass, etc.;
• Satellite based approaches
• NPP, GPP, NEP, Fire data and emission from
vegetation burning, Biomass maps;
• Modeling
• Atmospheric inversion, biogeochemical models,
dynamic vegetation modeling, phenology;
• Secondary data (including activity data) to
derive emission databases on emission
factors.

12. What are the challenges for Africa (LDC Box WG III-Chap 11)
• GHG will increase: food production leading to short term land
conversion
• Technology will not be sufficient for the necessary transitions
to low GHG
• Access to market and credits, capacities to implement
mitigation options
• Non-permanence and leakage
• Managing Risks, Co-benefits or trade-offs for mitigation (and
adaptation)

13. AFOLU and Low Emission Development Pathway
• AFOLU: a variety of mitigation options and a large, cost-
competitive mitigation potential—flexibility—for mitigation
technologies
• Projections: land‐related mitigation strategies (agriculture,
forestry, bioenergy) were projected to contribute 20 to 60% of
total cumulative abatement to 2030, and 15 to 45% in 2100.
• RISKS: potential implications for biodiversity, food
security and other services (ensuring co-benefits,
avoiding land competition)

14. These Options make economic
sense even without the
benefit of carbon finance

15. Managing trade-offs
Adaptation
Mitigation
Positive Negative
Positive
Soil carbon sequestration,
improved water holding
capacities, use of manure
instead, mixed agroforestry for
commercial products, income
diversification with trees,
reduced nitrogen fertilizer, fire
management
Dependence on biomass energy,
overuse of ecosystem services,
Increased use of mineral fertilizers
Poor management of nitrogen and
manure, over extraction of non-
timber products, timber extraction
Negative
Integral protection of forest
reserves, limited rights to
agroforestry trees, Forest
Plantation excluding harvest
Use of forest fires for pastoral and
land management, tree exclusion in
farming lands,
Bundling mitigation and adaptation benefits
Mbow et al, 2014-COSUST

16. Working Group III contribution to the IPCC Fifth
Assessment Report
CLIMATE CHANGE 2014
Mitigation of Climate Change
©Ocean/Corbis
www.mitigation2014.org